BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

12 results for “disallowance”+ Section 33Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai38Delhi16Kolkata12Visakhapatnam10Bangalore8Jaipur4Chennai3Hyderabad2SC1Pune1Guwahati1Calcutta1Cochin1Allahabad1Ahmedabad1Surat1

Key Topics

Section 14A11Section 35(1)(ii)10Section 143(1)8Section 2638Disallowance7Addition to Income6Section 2505Section 139(1)5Deduction5Section 154

DCIT, CIRCLE - 6,, KOLKATA vs. LOKNATH SARAF SECURITIES LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, to sum up ITA No

ITA 852/KOL/2008[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jul 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 43(5)Section 73

disallowed by him in the assessment completed under section 143(3) vide an order dated 13.12.2005. 6. Against the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3), an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) challenging, inter alia, the action of the Assessing Officer in I.T.A. No. 852/KOL./2008 Assessment year: 2003-2004 Assessment

NEETU AGARWAL,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOLKATA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1898/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2024AY 2021-22
4
Section 33A4
Double Taxation/DTAA2

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.1898/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Neetu Agarwal………………………………………………………….…..……Appellant Flat 6C, Block 2, Shree Ramnagar Residential Complex, Vip Road, Tegharia, W.B – 700052. [Pan: Actpa2426P] Vs. Ito, Kolkata……………..............…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Puja Agarwal, A.R, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pradip Biswas, Addl. Cit- Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 30, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 18, 2024 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 11.07.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee Is A Resident Individual, Who Filed Her Return Of Income On 29.12.2021 For The Financial Year 2020-21 Relevant To Assessment Year 2021-22 Reporting A Total Income Of Rs.25,58,440/-. The Assessee Discharged Her Tax Liability By Way Of Tax Deducted At Source Amounting To Rs.2,80,028/-, Self-Assessment Tax Of Rs.22,740/- & Foreign Tax Credit (‘Ftc’) Of Rs.2,25,936/-. The Assessee Also Filed Form.67 Which Was Filed On 25.01.2022. An Intimation U/S 143(1) Of The Act Was Issued On 28.10.2022 In Which The Ftc Was Not Provided To The Assessee. This Disallowance Resulted In Tax Demand Of Rs.2,79,130/-.

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 90

disallowing of FTC claim made by the petitioner and hence, the first respondent is directed to consider only on the aspect of rejection of FTC claim within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.” 19. Respectfully following the order of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy

NEETU AGARWAL,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - WARD 7(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 67/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Puja Agarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Abhishek Kumar, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234BSection 250Section 90

disallowing of FTC claim made by the petitioner and hence, the first 10 Neetu Agarwal AY: 2020-21 respondent is directed to consider only on the aspect of rejection of FTC claim within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.” 19. Respectfully following the order of the Hon’ble Madras High Court

RAJDA POLYMERS,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-36, KOLKATA

In the result, this assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 2414/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 16Section 35Section 35(1)(ii)

section I 33A(3)(iii) of the Act makes it clear that the material collected and statement recorded during the survey U/S 133A of the Act are not conclusive piece of evidences by itself. This decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court was affirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs S Khader Khan Sons

MRITYUNJAY KUMAR SINGH,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 23(1),, HOOGHLY

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 734/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata01 Feb 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 36(1)(va)

section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act. 3. With the assistance of ld. Representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. In the return of income, the auditor of the assessee has committed an error by mentioning the due date for making the payment of employees’ and employer’s contribution towards the Provident Fund Account and accordingly

DHOLAI TEA CO.LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-4, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 512/KOL/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Mar 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 143(2)

section 14A of the Income Tax Act. 7. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has shown dividend income of Rs.4,75,082/-. It has added back Rs.62,122/- towards expenditure. In other words, it has made a suo motu disallowance of expenditure at Rs.62,122/-. However, ld. Assessing Officer worked out the disallowance at Rs.2

SKP SECURITIES LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, C.C-2(2), KOL, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 611/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.611/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Skp Securities Ltd……………...................................................……Appellant 33A, J L Nehru Road, Park Street, Kolkata. [Pan: Aaecs3847A] Vs. Dcit, C.C-2(2), Kolkata................................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Akshay Ringasia, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri B. K. Singh, Jcit- Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : September 04, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 16, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 22.03.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. That The Ld. Lower Authorities Erred In Law & In Fact By Making An Addition Of Inr 1,00,270 Under Section 14A When The Assessee Had Sufficient Fund To Make Investment Out Of Own Funds. 2. That The Ld. Lower Authorities Erred In Law & In Fact By Making An Addition Of Inr 1,00,270 Under Section 14A When The Assessee Did Not Earn Any Exempted Income In The First Place.

Section 14ASection 250

33A, J L Nehru Road, Park Street, Kolkata. [PAN: AAECS3847A] vs. DCIT, C.C-2(2), Kolkata................................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri Akshay Ringasia, AR, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri B. K. Singh, JCIT- Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : September 04, 2023 Date of pronouncing the order : November 16, 2023 आदेश / ORDER संजय

VRV TRADING COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO 5(1) KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1464/KOL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyi.T.A. No.1464/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2010-11

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 151(1)Section 250

33A, J. L. Nehru Road, Kolkata- 700071. (PAN: AACCV3661K) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appearances by: N o n e appeared for the Appellant Shri L. N. Dash, Addl. CIT (DR) appeared for Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : 09.05.2024 Date of pronouncing the order : 28.05.2024 ORDER Per Manish Borad, Accountant Member: This appeal filed by the assessee pertaining to the Assessment Year

INDRADHANUSH AGENCIES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-8(4), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1668/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] Assessment Year: 2014-15

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 148Section 35(1)(ii)

Section 12AA(3) of the Act w.e.f. 01.10.2004. 8. We hold that the ratio decidendi of the aforesaid judgement of the Hon’ble Apex Court would squarely be applicable to the facts of the instant case. Infact the assessee’s case herein falls on a much better footing than the facts before the Hon’ble Apex Court. In the case

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. ANJAN INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, revenue appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 878/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 139(1)Section 41(1)

disallowed it will amount to 42.6% of the Net Profit is also fallacious and thus an incorrect view. Be that as it may be, however we note that AO has made the addition only on the basis of the Inspector’s report that M/s. Tara Metal Trading Co (sundry creditor) could not be found in the address furnished

PRISAM LOGISTICS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, CIR. 1, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 129/KOL/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 147Section 263Section 44A

disallowed and at 2 | P a g e Prism Logistics Pvt. Ltd., A.Y. 2011-12 any rate only the net profit embedded in the transaction could have been brought to tax and not the entire expenditure made to the sub-contractor. Therefore, according to the assessee, the AO after making thorough enquiry on the issue of claim of expenditure

M/S CHENGMARI TEA CO. LTD,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-4(1), KOLKATA

Appeal is allowed

ITA 812/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Years: 2014-15

Section 115JSection 263Section 33A

disallowance(s) / addition(s) thereby assessing the assessee’s carried forward losses of ₹49,68,628/- followed by sec. 115JB computation of ₹1,51,79,827/-. 3. Case file suggests that the PCIT thereafter proposed to invoke his sec. 263 revision jurisdiction by treating the above regular assessment as erroneous causing prejudice to the interest of Revenue. He issued